Tate v. Cate et al

Filing 61

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE to Plaintiff why Defendant Villasayne Should not be Dismissed without Prejudice from this Lawsuit signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 02/02/2012. Show Cause Response due by 2/27/2012. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

LARRY TATE,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
)
MATTHEW CATE, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
_______________________________________ )

Case No.: 1:09-cv-00770 JLT
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE TO PLAINTIFF
WHY DEFENDANT VILLASAYNE SHOULD
NOT BE DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE
FROM THIS LAWSUIT

On December 27, 2010, the Court ordered the United States Marshal to serve Defendant

18

Villasayne with the summons and complaint. (Doc. 27) On February 17, 2011, the Marshal returned

19

the summons unexecuted. (Doc, 28) The CDCR reported that Defendant Villasayne was a “contract

20

doctor” and had no record where he could be served. Id. On February 28, 2011, the Court, again,

21

ordered the Marshal to serve this defendant via Legal Affairs of the CDCR. (Doc. 29)

22

On June 23, 2011, the Marshal reported that they had not been able to serve Defendant

23

Villasayne and, once again, returned the summons unexecuted. (Doc. 51) The Marshal attempted

24

personal service three times but was not able to serve this Defendant. Id.

25

According to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4,

26

If a defendant is not served within 120 days after the complaint is filed, the court - on
motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff - must dismiss the action without
prejudice against the defendant or order that service be made within a specified time.
But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court must extend the
time for service for an appropriate period.

27
28

1

1

(Emphasis added.) Rule 4(m) “encourages efficient litigation by minimizing the time between the

2

commencement of an action and service of process.” Electric Specialty Co. v. Road and Ranch

3

Supply, Inc., 967 F.2d 309, 311 (9th Cir. 1992) (addressing former F. R. Civ. P. 4(j).)

4
5

This matter has been pending for nearly three years. The Marshal has made diligent effort
but has been unable to serve Defendant Villasayne.

6

ORDER

7

Therefore, on its own motion, the Court ORDERS,

8

1.

9
10
11

Within 21 days of the date of service of this order, Plaintiff SHALL show cause why
Defendant Villasayne should not be dismissed without prejudice from this lawsuit;

2.

Alternatively, Plaintiff SHALL notify the Court that he chooses to proceed in lawsuit
only against those defendants who have been served.

12

Plaintiff is advised that his failure to comply with this order will result in the Court dismissing

13

this defendant without prejudice.

14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16

Dated: February 2, 2012
9j7khi

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2